I wasn't surprised when I found out it was a law firm either. I've had the good fortune to work with some of the good ones, but legal marketing in general requires a very sensitive a-hole detector.
Nowadays, if I'm contacted by a law firm for work, I look into their reputation very carefully. In my experience, corporate law firms--regardless of size--aren't a big deal compared to some of the high volume personal injury/immigration/divorce/etc. firms. And yes, I realize I'm doing a lot of generalizing here.
In my country, if they'd interfered with existing business relationships causing expected revenues to be lost, they'd made potentially libellous statements that caused a major source of expected future revenues to permanently block access, there was ample written evidence that they did these things deliberately and that actual losses were and would continue to result, and there was ample evidence that the victim had previously been well-regarded and able to command a certain rate for their services, I wouldn't want to be their position, law firm or not. Situations like this are exactly why defamation cases can result in such huge damages being awarded.
For what little it might be worth, not all legal systems are quite that bad.
The real problem is that there is no efficient system to weed out the crooks. There are no efficient pressure against them. Psychopats are king.
The ironic thing is that my experience was nearly 20 years ago. While so much has changed in the last 20 years (in Internet time, that's like 400 years, and I have more RAM in my phone than the Unix server supporting 40 users on serial terminals), some things haven't, especially where humans and the legal profession are concerned.
I don't intend to paint all attorneys with the same brush--I now have good relationships with several attorneys that I use for businesses; I still would seriously question any job working for a legal firm.